DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because it includes reference characters which are not enclosed within parentheses. Claim 1, line 19 recites “an actuator 123” and should be amended to recite “an actuator (123)”.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 1, 3, 4 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 5 recites “configured to one of distract” and should be amended to recite “configured to one of: distract”.
Claim 1, line 13 recites “ in one of the clockwise” and should be amended to recite “in one of: the clockwise”.
Claim 1, line 13 recites “and anticlockwise direction” and should be amended to recite “and the anticlockwise direction”.
Claim 1, lines 14-15 recite “the extramedullary implant comprises” and should be amended to recite “the extramedullary implant comprises:”.
Claim 1, line 16 recites “to receive at least one of energy” and should be amended to recite “to receive at least one of: energy”.
Claim 1, line 30 recites “wireless controller (130) comprises” and should be amended to recite “wireless controller (130) comprises:”.
Claim 1, line 31 recites “transmitting least one of” and should be amended to recite “transmitting at least one of:”.
Claim 3, line 2 recites “implant (120) configured to” and should be amended to recite “implant (120) is configured to”.
Claim 3, line 9 recites “implant (120) configured to” and should be amended to recite “implant (120) is configured to”.
Claim 3, line 11 recites “ comprises one of” and should be amended to recite “comprises one of:”.
Claim 4, line 4 recites “nail (110) configured” and should be amended to recite “nail (110) configured to”.
Claim 4, line 5 recites “to one of distract” and should be amended to recite “to one of: distract”.
Claim 4, line 13 recites “implant (140) configured” and should be amended to recite “implant (140) is configured”.
Claim 4, line 13 recites “ magnetically, comprises” and should be amended to recite “magnetically, comprises:”.
Claim 4, line 15 recites “the gearbox (142) operatively connected” and should be amended to recite “the gearbox (142) is operatively connected”.
Claim 4, line 21 recites “controller (130) comprises” and should be amended to recite “controller (130) comprises:”.
Claim 4, lines 26-27 recite “the magnetically operated the extramedullary implant (140)” and should be amended to recite “the magnetically operated extramedullary implant (140)”.
Claim 8, line 4 recites “unit (113) configured to” and should be amended to recite “unit (113) is configured to”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "distract bone segments (14, 15)" in line 5. It is unclear whether bone segments are referring to the bone segments disclosed in 3-4, or if it is referring to new bone segments. For the purpose of examining the claim, “distract bone segments (14, 15)” in line 5 will be interpreted as “distract the bone segments (14, 15)”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "compress bone segments (14, 15)" in lines 5-6. It is unclear whether bone segments are referring to the bone segments disclosed in 3-4, or if it is referring to new bone segments. For the purpose of examining the claim, “compress bone segments (14, 15)” in lines 5-6 will be interpreted as “compress the bone segments (14, 15)”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the bone lengthening intramedullary nail (110)" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examining the claim, “the bone lengthening intramedullary nail (110)” will be interpreted as “the intramedullary bone lengthening nail (110)” as disclosed in line 3. Furthermore, “the bone lengthening intramedullary nail (110)” recited in lines 21-22 will be interpreted as “the intramedullary bone lengthening nail (110)”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "one or more control signals" in line 32. It is unclear whether the one or more control signals are referring to the one or more control signals disclosed in line 17, or if it is referring to new control signals. For the purpose of examining the claim, “one or more control signals” in line 32 will be interpreted as “the one or more control signals”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "an acoustic signal" in lines 35-36. It is unclear whether the acoustic signal is referring to the one or more acoustic signals disclosed in lines 25-26, or if it is referring to a new acoustic signal. For the purpose of examining the claim, “an acoustic signal” in lines 35-36 will be interpreted as “an acoustic signal of the one or more acoustic signals”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the extracorporeal wireless controller system (130)” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examining the claim, “the extracorporeal wireless controller system (130)” will be interpreted as “the extracorporeal wireless controller (130)” as disclosed in line 27 of claim 1.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “a transmitter (132)” in line 3. It is unclear whether it is referring to the transmitter disclosed in line 31 of claim 1, or if a new transmitter is being claimed. For the purpose of examining the claim, “a transmitter (132)” in line 3 of claim 2 will be interpreted as “the transmitter (132)”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "one or more control signals" in lines 5-6. It is unclear whether the one or more control signals are referring to the one or more control signals disclosed in line 17 of claim 1, or if it is referring to new control signals. For the purpose of examining the claim, “one or more control signals” in lines 5-6 of claim 2 will be interpreted as “the one or more control signals”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "a receiver (121)" in line 7. It is unclear whether a receiver is referring to the receiver disclosed in line 16 of claim 1, or if a new receiver is being claimed. For the purpose of examining the claim, “a receiver (121)” in line 7 of claim 2 will be interpreted as “the receiver (121)”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “a control circuit (122)” in line 9. It is unclear whether a control circuit is referring to the control circuit disclosed in line 18 of claim 1, or if a new control circuit is being claimed. For the purpose of examining the claim, “a control circuit (122)” in line 9 of claim 2 will be interpreted as “the control circuit (122)”.
Claim 2 recites “the said signals” in line 10. It is unclear whether said signals is referring the one or more control signals, or the one or more acoustic signals. For the purpose of examining the claim, “the said signals” will be interpreted as “the one or more control signals”.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "actuator (123)” in lines 5-6. It is unclear whether the actuator is referring to the actuator disclosed in line 19 of claim 1, or if a new actuator is being claimed. For the purpose of examining the claim, “actuator (123)” in lines 5-6 of claim 3 will be interpreted as “the actuator (123)”.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "and one or more control signals" in lines 12-13. It is unclear whether one or more control signals are referring to the one or more control signals disclosed in line 17 of claim 1, or if it is referring to new control signals. For the purpose of examining the claim, “and one or more control signals” in lines 12-13 of claim 3 will be interpreted as “and the one or more control signals”.
Claim 3 recites “and signal” in line 15. It is unclear whether this is referring the one or more control signals, or the one or more acoustic signals. For the purpose of examining the claim, “and signal” will be interpreted as “and the one or more control signals”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "distract bone segments (14, 15)" in line 5. It is unclear whether bone segments are referring to the bone segments disclosed in 3-4 of claim 4, or if it is referring to new bone segments. For the purpose of examining the claim, “distract bone segments (14, 15)” in line 5 will be interpreted as “distract the bone segments (14, 15)”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "compress bone segments (14, 15)" in line 5. It is unclear whether bone segments are referring to the bone segments disclosed in 3-4 of claim 4, or if it is referring to new bone segments. For the purpose of examining the claim, “compress bone segments (14, 15)” in line 5 will be interpreted as “compress the bone segments (14, 15)”.
Claim 4 recites “and anticlockwise direction” in line 11. It is unclear whether this is referring to the anticlockwise direction disclosed in line 7, or if it is referring to a new anticlockwise direction. For the purpose of examining the claim, “and anticlockwise direction” in line 11 of claim 4 will be interpreted as “and the anticlockwise direction”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "of motion translation unit" in line 5. It is unclear whether it is referring to the motion translation unit disclosed in lines 7-8 of claim 4, or if it is referring to a new motion translation unit. For the purpose of examining the claim, “of motion translation unit” in line 5 and claim 8 will be interpreted as “of the motion translation unit”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Forsell (U.S. Publication No.2021/0393301 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Forsell discloses a wirelessly operable implant system for providing controlled lengthening of a bone comprising: an intramedullary bone lengthening nail (300) attached to bone segments (Figure 11), wherein the intramedullary bone lengthening nail is configured to one of: distract the bone segments and compress the bone segments (see the embodiment of Figure 7a and 11) upon receiving a rotational motion in one of a clockwise direction and anticlockwise direction at an input member of a motion translation unit (via electrical motor 302, see para.0206), the motion translation unit is integrated in the intramedullary bone lengthening nail (see Figure 7a); an extramedullary implant (electrical motor 302) operatively connected to the intramedullary bone lengthening nail for providing the rotational motion in one of: the clockwise direction and the anticlockwise direction at the input member of the motion translation unit (para.0206), the extramedullary implant comprises: a receiver (external energy-transmission device 304) configured to receive at least one of: energy and one or more control signals wirelessly (para.0295); an implant control circuit (switch 323); an actuator configured to provide one or more actuations for providing the rotational motion to the input member (see actuator 305 in Figure 7a, see also para.0206) of the motion translation unit (302) whereby operating the intramedullary bone lengthening nail (para.0206); one or more actuation feedback sensors (325) configured to sense the provided one or more actuations (para.0314); acoustic transmitter configured to transmit one or more acoustic signals wirelessly (external energy-transmission device 304 also includes a wireless remote control having an external signal transmitter, see para.0290); and an extracorporeal wireless controller operatively connected to the extramedullary implant for transmitting at least one of the energy and one or more control signals, and receiving the one or more acoustic signals (para.0290), the extracorporeal wireless controller comprises: a transmitter (para.0290) configured for transmitting at least one of the energy and the one or more control signals wirelessly to the extramedullary implant; a control board (para.0295); and an acoustic receiver (para.0295) configured for receiving the acoustic signal as a feedback signal from the said extramedullary implant (para.0295), whereby providing the controlled lengthening of the bone.
PNG
media_image1.png
420
580
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 4-8 are allowed, once the claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) discussed above have been resolved.
Claim 2 in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, the claimed combination of limitations recited in independent claim 1 and dependent claim 2. In particular, none of the cited references teach or suggest wherein the extracorporeal wireless controller comprises: the transmitter configured to generate electromagnetic waves modulated in patterns corresponding to distinct control signals of the control signals, wherein the electromagnetic waves transfer the energy and the one or more control signals concurrently; and the receiver of the extramedullary implant configured to receive at least one of the energy and the one or more control signals, wherein the control circuit of the extramedullary implant is configured to interpret the control signals to execute one or more actions including one of lengthening actuation, compression actuation, transmitting identity, and transmitting actuation feedback, as required by claim 2.
Claim 3 in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, the claimed combination of limitations recited in independent claim 1 and dependent claim 3. In particular, none of the cited references teach or suggest wherein the extramedullary implant is configured to perform a bidirectional exchange of wireless signals with the extracorporeal wireless controller, the extramedullary implant configured to transmit the one or more acoustic signals including identity details, actuation performed by the actuator, and status of the extramedullary implant, to the extracorporeal wireless controller, wherein the extracorporeal wireless controller upon receiving the acoustic signal from the extramedullary implant, configured to determine one or more course of actions, the one or more course of actions comprises one of transmitting at least one of the energy, and one or more control signals corresponding to lengthening of bone, compression of bone and query for identity of the extramedullary implant; and interrupting transmission of at least one of the energy and the one or more control signals, as required by claim 3.
Claims 4-8 in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, the claimed combination of limitations recited in independent claim 4. In particular, none of the cited references teach or suggest an extramedullary implant operatively connected to the intramedullary bone lengthening nail for providing the rotational motion in one of the clockwise direction and the anticlockwise direction, at the input member of the motion translation unit, wherein the extramedullary implant configured to be operated magnetically, comprises a driven magnetic array coupled to a gearbox, wherein the gearbox operatively connected to a connecting shaft, the connecting shaft operatively connected to the input member of the motion translation unit; and an extracorporeal wireless controller operatively connected to the extramedullary implant for magnetically operating the extramedullary implant, the extracorporeal wireless controller configured to be placed on a skin extracorporeally covering the magnetically operated the extramedullary implant, as required by claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed under the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christina Negrelli whose telephone number is 571-270-7389. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, between 8:00am to 4:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo Robert, at (571) 272-4719. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTINA NEGRELLI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3773
/EDUARDO C ROBERT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights